Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Is it time to ban private schools watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by intelligent con)
    I find it disgusting how these toff factories are still allowed to operate. Everyone who has come to my comprehensive from a private school has been posh and weird so this shows how people in these schools live in a bubble. Additionally it is scientifically proven that state schooled children are smarter than public school ones and do better at uni. Why do we honestly allow these elitist institutions to continue to operate? I wish blair had abolished them while labour was still in power and hope corbyn puts this in his manifesto. Why should money buy people good grades?
    ....sounds to me if they came to your school from a private school, then they couldn't keep up the re-payments so perhaps they weren't so well off after all. If people work hard, value education and feel its worth spending money on why shouldn't they. I found state school hopeless as an environment for learning (didn't stop me getting my degree later though) Private school I imagine has smaller class sizes, one to one, attention on students, and a broader curriculum that includes all kinds of things to make learning fun. Kids from well off families are often better behaved, keen to learn instead of obstructive, and more personable. Yes they have an advantage, so what's new. Money buys privilege-welcome to real life.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Johann von Gauss)
    Slightly hypocritical, coming from an Oxbridge applicant...

    You know Cambridge has more resources than other Universities, right? They offer their students extensive libraries, 1:1 supervisions, guaranteed accommodation, stuff other Universities cannot afford. They do this, and are encouraged to do this, because their students are the best. Their students will, given the opportunity, do great things. It would be great if everyone was given that opportunity, but that is unfeasible. Should we ensure nobody gets that opportunity? Maybe, but can you imagine what effect that will have on science and industry?
    Great, you turned it into a personal attack.


    Universities are different because that's where the playing field is almost levelled. It is the leading up to university and employment that needs to be equal, so every child has the same opportunity to do well and go to the university or job of their choice.

    Yes, I do know what Cambridge has to offer, and I've made that choice, thinking it through, to apply there because it will help me establish a career. At the age of 11, I daresay a child even knows what they want to do. I desperately wanted to go to a religious school back then, for instance.

    It's not hypocritical for me to apply to Oxbridge because I have accquired the main academic skills to be able to apply in the past 6-7 years in school. I'll say this again, what matters is that each child has the same resources to accquire those skills. They get the skills and then choose to do what they'd like.

    I also like how you side stepped all my other points to get your personal attack through.
    Well played.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    The envy is real.

    Where are your sources to prove comprehensive schools are better?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i like private schools
    (Original post by Cold 187um)
    I don't know if they're all toffees, but I'd prefer that to being surrounded by thugs. I'm no G, and because of that I couldn't mix it up with the thugs at my comprehensive school and had an absolutely horrible 5 years. I'd rather be in an environment where the other students care about their education and are civilised and respectful. I also spent an amazing couple of years at a top grammar school, in stark contrast to my previous school, it was the best 2 years of my life, it gave me a taste of just how perfect and wonderful school can be when you're surrounded by civilised people who come from middle/upper class backgrounds. No bullies, no thugs, no Gs, and it was 95% white. I feel extremely strongly about this matter because I've experienced the two opposing ends of the spectrum, I lived it, I survived it. Went to the roughest school in my county, then moved to the top grammar, so I got a taste of both ends of the spectrum, and my experience was incredibly eye opening and revealing. I was astounded by the environment in the grammar school, I experienced literally no bullying or disrespect whatsoever. Never been to a private school, I imagine it would be even better, but I don't know. Any parent who is serious about education and who cares about their child's experience at school will never send them to a comprehensive because they're full of low social classes.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Yes.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    I don't see it as part of 'the education system'. I see it as private citizens legitimately making their own arrangements, and consider that they are entirely entitled to do so; it is an additional point in this direction that they have paid their proper dues to the state regardless of the fact that they don't use the state's educational provision. It's fundamentally none of the state's business how a parent chooses to educate their children where they choose to do so outside the state system, except so far as concerns the welfare of the child.

    If admissions tutors choose to take educational background into account in assessing which candidates have the most merit, I'm all for that. However, universities are concerned with choosing the best students, not with trying to use the admissions process as a means to change society. If, therefore, you don't want privately educated pupils to have any advantages over state schooled pupils, I suggest you advocate for the improvement of the state system.

    However, to seek to eradicate all advantage to certain pupils is an utterly hopeless task. For a start, state schools are as much an issue here as private schools: on the present system you can buy your way into top state schools by moving into expensive areas, and getting rid of private schools wouldn't change that one little bit. Nor would it change the tremendous effect that parents have on their children's educational development. What are you going to do, stop teachers giving their own children help at home? You're chasing an impossible idea of 'fairness'. Far better to let people make whatever arrangements for their children's education they wish, and make sure that tutors know of the extra preparation they've had for interviews etc in assessing their applications.
    You don't seem to be reading my posts before replying to them: I haven't said that the government should disband private schools by force. Your responses seem to be more general and aimed at a broad group of people who don't agree with you rather than me specifically.

    Those private citizens can continue doing what they're doing; that doesn't change the fact that what they're doing is wrong. As far as 'universities are concerned with choosing the best students' goes, that's no unchangeable reality, and neither does the present system of admissions guarantee that they do get the best students. It's pretty easy for a mediocre child at a private school to be coached all the way to a top university and, granted, it's more likely he or she might then begin to falter as they realise that they actually have to apply themselves. However, this 'solution' of yours does nothing to address the fact that that person will have deprived somebody else of a place at that university and on that course and if he or she drops out, that would have done nothing to correct that problem. Your suggestion of simply improving the state school system is laughable at best -- do you really think that the private/grammar school system would give up their monopoly that easily?

    Given that you still seem to be under the impression that I'm advocating for a ban on private education, there's not much that I can say to your last paragraph, other than to point out that this thread is about private schools rather than state schools. Yes, there are plenty of problems in state schools, but this isn't the place to be discussing them. And nor does the fact that there are problems in the state school system mitigate, as you suggest, the problems of the private school system. 'Oh, but state schools are bad too' is not a good argument against removing the advantage received by private (and arguably grammar) school children at the level of university admissions. Anybody can use words like 'impossible' and 'hopeless', but you've yet to say anything that convinces me that either of those is true regarding this particular problem.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jared44)
    The envy is real.

    Where are your sources to prove comprehensive schools are better?
    1. Dianne Abbott is an idiot
    2. Dianne Abbott sent her children to a private school
    3. Comprehensive schools are better

    Are my workings correct?
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Riverstar)
    Private schools actually benefit everyone, not just the pupils who go there.
    I go to a private school, yet my parents still pay taxes which go to our local state school.
    Therefore, my parents are paying for a school which I don't attend. This means that the state school is still getting money, and they are less one student (because I go to private), leaving more room and resources for students who do go to the state school.
    This argument has already been made and exposed to be nonsense. How if I put it like this: 'My parents pay taxes that fund state schools, despite my going to a private school. This supposed benefit is great enough to justify the fact that I am fundamentally more privileged when applying to universities, particularly top universities.' I don't think that this supposed benefit does justify that. Very nice to see that you suffer from the same Messiah complex that a lot of other privately educated people on this thread suffer from.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 41b)
    Much better we abolish state schools. Fully private schools would allow real educational freedom and competition.
    I wonder how much time is wasted in disciplining kids in state schools, to the detriment of kids keen but hense disadvantaged by the poor learning environment.. Why can't a state school be as good as a private school? Teachers leave state school teaching in droves every year, and relish the chance of working in a private or grammar school. The problem is the disease of "poor discipline" that's all it is, and I'm amazed the government hasn't got a handle on the problem by now as it undermines everything.

    Worth mentioning.... no private school is going to be able to "give you more intelligence", or a talent you didn't originally possess. What they do well perhaps is provide the optimum environment for those things to flourish.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by intelligent con)
    I find it disgusting how these toff factories are still allowed to operate. Everyone who has come to my comprehensive from a private school has been posh and weird so this shows how people in these schools live in a bubble.(1) Additionally it is scientifically proven that state schooled children are smarter than public school ones and do better at uni.(2) Why do we honestly allow these elitist institutions to continue to operate?(3) I wish blair had abolished them while labour was still in power and hope corbyn puts this in his manifesto. Why should money buy people good grades?(4)
    1)Even if everybody who came from a private school really were "posh and weird", so what? It also isn't proof that privately educated students live in a bubble, but I'll admit that they're often removed from the world the average comprehensive student lives in, but having said that, doesn't everyone live in their own unique bubble? A comprehensive student knows the life of a comprehensive student, but then again, only within their own town, peer group, etc. Is a comprehensive student's experience of the world somehow more real or superior to that of a privately educated person?

    2) I'd like to see the research, but assuming you're correct, what does that matter?

    3) Why shouldn't they be able to operate? They typically offer superior schooling than the state provides.For what reason should they be shut down? Because some people don't have access because of the cost? It may achieve equality in terms of education that everyone receives, but, and perhaps this idea may be controversial, but I don't believe in pulling people down (who aren't doing anything wrong in itself) for the sake of equality.Equality before the law is a great thing. Assisting disadvantaged people is also a great thing, but penalising people who are doing better than me or trying to get ahead of me I find completely ridiculous. Do you know part of the reason why? Because if he isn't allowed to try to out-do me, then I don't have the opportunity to try to out-compete him.

    4) It doesn't buy grades. It (typically) buys a superior education. Again, what's the problem? It's not fair? Life's not fair. Get over it. Some people earned a load of money and they want to spend that money on a good education for their children. How is that a problem?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by enaayrah)
    Why should a small group of students be taken away from the rest and given better resources and help? All too funded by the government. Sorry, what gives them the right to have that over others?

    Come on, think about it, these kids are already blessed with ability, and then to have extra exclusively for them...
    We know these kids are the best but what about the rest? Yeah let's dump them into comprehensives, give them fewer resources and the worst teaching available and no room to improve themselves.

    Besides, in practice, too many wealthier parents pay to tutor their kids to the hilt for those entrance exams. Grammar schools are also usually in particular areas so that those same parents don't have to pay to send their little darling to a top school. Attracting poor but bright? Sod that.

    How do you accurately measure academic ability in a 11 year old anyway? :confused:

    In a sense, grammar schools are actually worse than private. Yes, private schools create divisions, but grammar schools are inequality served to you by the same people who are supposed to advocate equality.

    Actually my grammar school is only part funded by the government and my parents pay a small voluntary fee to the school. Because of this our resources are no better than a comprehensive's. The main difference between my school and a comprehensive is the quality of the teaching staff and the fact that myself and the large majority of others are deadly serious about our education. Therefore lessons are taken very seriously and there is minimal disruption, unlike (what I've been told by many others who go to them) comprehensives.

    I do agree however that its wrong when wealthy parents pay to tutor their kids for the entrance exams - it deafets the purpose and is abusing the system. To combat this I would support what others have suggested - put a household income restriction on grammar schools.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by versari)
    I wonder how much time is wasted in disciplining kids in state schools, to the detriment of kids keen but hense disadvantaged by the poor learning environment.. Why can't a state school be as good as a private school? Teachers leave state school teaching in droves every year, and relish the chance of working in a private or grammar school. The problem is the disease of "poor discipline" that's all it is, and I'm amazed the government hasn't got a handle on the problem by now as it undermines everything.

    Worth mentioning.... no private school is going to be able to "give you more intelligence", or a talent you didn't originally possess. What they do well perhaps is provide the optimum environment for those things to flourish.
    Exactly. Many of my teaches have previously worked in state schools and said they would never return. One teacher in particular left to be the head of department at a state school and the year after he re-applied for his job, as the behaviour in the state school was so awful. Another teacher who had previously worked at a state school had a chair thrown at her. Another commented on how relived he was to be teaching in an all girls grammar school, claiming that we were so much calmer and more willing to do work than the pupils at his last school.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hektik)
    1)Even if everybody who came from a private school really were "posh and weird", so what? It also isn't proof that privately educated students live in a bubble, but I'll admit that they're often removed from the world the average comprehensive student lives in, but having said that, doesn't everyone live in their own unique bubble? A comprehensive student knows the life of a comprehensive student, but then again, only within their own town, peer group, etc. Is a comprehensive student's experience of the world somehow more real or superior to that of a privately educated person?

    2) I'd like to see the research, but assuming you're correct, what does that matter?

    3) Why shouldn't they be able to operate? They typically offer superior schooling than the state provides.For what reason should they be shut down? Because some people don't have access because of the cost? It may achieve equality in terms of education that everyone receives, but, and perhaps this idea may be controversial, but I don't believe in pulling people down (who aren't doing anything wrong in itself) for the sake of equality.Equality before the law is a great thing. Assisting disadvantaged people is also a great thing, but penalising people who are doing better than me or trying to get ahead of me I find completely ridiculous. Do you know part of the reason why? Because if he isn't allowed to try to out-do me, then I don't have the opportunity to try to out-compete him.

    4) It doesn't buy grades. It (typically) buys a superior education. Again, what's the problem? It's not fair? Life's not fair. Get over it. Some people earned a load of money and they want to spend that money on a good education for their children. How is that a problem?
    OP's a troll, don't feed him, just watch the left congratulate themselves.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonny360)
    HELL NO!

    Someone in a private school isn't violating your body or property rights so you have NO RIGHT restricting their freedom you authoritarian/totalitarian/fascist.

    Banning something just because YOU don't have it is absolutely ridiculous.
    Indeed. You wouldn't find men banning boobies just because they don't have them. That would be madness. A world without boobies.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    No, it is not time to ban private schools. Your reasoning is ridiculous.

    I go to a private day and boarding school and went to a state secondary. You pay for the privilege and they operate as a business. Most of them run as charities and offer bursaries and scholarships. People should stop acting as though they are totally unaccessible to people who can't afford them - they're not. You don't get any university privileges by the way either; universities care about your ability academically, not where you developed that.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    It's not time to ban private schools. It's time to put proper funding into state schools, with well-payed teachers who are properly supported by the government and school management, so that state schools get so good that there is no longer any purpose for the existence of state schools...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm 17 years old.
    I've been to both a private school (boarding) and a comprehensive state school. I am currently in a grammar school.
    I went to the private school on a music scholarship.
    With £30,000 payed by each student's parents a year, I can confirm the standard of support, teaching and general facility qualities are incomparable to that of state schools.
    In my local comprehensive, where I attended after I left the private school, there was shouting in the classrooms, teachers who could barely speak english and a lack of student support.
    However, the 'human quality' of state schools is far more extensive than anything that can be seen in private schools.
    I was bullied, pretty badly in the private school where I attended. They had almost medieval rituals such as the 'house run' which included running around the boarding house completely naked whilst being hit with anything that could be found (for me this included bricks and rugby boots). As well as this there was 'fagging' where older boys would force the younger students (me at the time) to do their bidding.
    Of course, the state school had its fair share of idiots and crack-heads. However in general the people there were more street wise, intelligent (perhaps not as well educated) and also generally nicer and would chip in for lunch money and look after you if you needed help.
    The friends I made at my local comprehensive have helped me a great deal and are honestly people I want to keep close to me throughout life.

    I agree that at this point private schools are dangerous. They represent a divide in current society between those who have money and those who don't.
    The true meaning of 'opportunity for all' begins in the classroom.
    To build a more cohesive, stable society we need to join together the wealthy billion-air kids with the welfare kids in schools all on a level playing field, their success judged on attitude to work, not money in their parents bank accounts.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ivybridge)
    No, it is not time to ban private schools. Your reasoning is ridiculous.

    I go to a private day and boarding school and went to a state secondary. You pay for the privilege and they operate as a business. Most of them run as charities and offer bursaries and scholarships. People should stop acting as though they are totally unaccessible to people who can't afford them - they're not. You don't get any university privileges by the way either; universities care about your ability academically, not where you developed that.
    Are you posh tho?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think that the amount of money your parents have should affect the standard of your education, it just isn't fair! I agree that private schools have nicer facilities and often the students get into better paid professions however, is this more of a case of 'who you know' rather than 'what you know'? As a high achieving student from a comprehensive school I feel that I would have had much better opportunities at a private school but my family just couldn't afford to send me there, it is even become a struggle to pay for university now that the maintenance grant has been scrapped and this just isn't fair. Your standard of education shouldn't be based on your wealth but your eagerness to work.
    I understand that this is a far fetched and quite a radical idea and it would be almost impossible to 'abolish all private schools' but the education system is flawed in many ways and with children from better backgrounds going into all the top professions it has sparked a never ending cycle. The success of private schools is not in their teachers but they teach children to seek the best and they put much more emphasis on eagerness to learn. Maybe comprehensive schools would be much more successful if they taught this to their pupils instead of just giving up on them, they make little effort to get to know the strengths and weaknesses of each child.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Melancholy)
    Are you posh tho?
    Define 'posh'?
 
 
 
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.